TweakMDS wrote:
Canon's 50mm F/1.8 is EF though, isn't it?
Yes. But one day you may find yourself wanting to use the ET on the 18-55 or some other, "better" EFS lens and will find that it's impossible. I am not telling you not to get the Keknos - just be aware of this.
If you like the handling of your friend's 30D more than the 400D, going for the 40D seems logical to me.If you are going to spend a lot of time enjoing this hobby, the extra control wheel will be appreciated.I don't know if the 450 has spot metering.Have read only positive things about the 17-50, sounds like a mighty fine combo to me.
jvarszegi wrote:
I just can't help feeling the OP is getting bad advice. Many of you are advising him to get the bigger camera because it's bigger, when he's upgrading from a point and shoot. You're advising him to get the bigger camera because of a nearly unnoticeable difference in viewfinder size, again to someone who's only used a point and shoot. He can probably reuse existing SD cards in the XSi-- anyone thought of that? etc. etc. etc. ... and you're advising him to get a more expensive camera when he's on a very limited budget.
Bigger is always better
But seriously, the OP should go to the store himself and try both cameras out. That is the only way he can decide what is best for him. The specs are known. He got some feedback on his two options. Now it is time to feel, look and play with both cameras to really understand how they differ
But seriously, the OP should go to the store himself and try both cameras out. That is the only way he can decide what is best for him. The specs are known. He got some feedback on his two options. Now it is time to feel, look and play with both cameras to really understand how they differ
Fair enough.
OP, note you can get another lens (or the 17-50 instead of the 18-55) for the difference in bodies. Also really think about what you will want to spend on a flash and other accessories. Good luck with your choice.
I had the same dilemma when I got my XSI and I decided on XSI because of the price and the weight (not that it matters too much, I have the battery-grip extension on my camera most of the time) and I can upgrade anytime if I want to anyways but I'd rather learn/develop my skills and be able to maximize the camera. When the XSI arrived I enrolled in a basic photography class, soon I'll get more classes to advance my skills. But definitely in the future I will be upgrading to a weather sealed camera (canon or nikon or whatever brand) because I would love to take pics under the rain/snow/beach if I can.
Also please read books about dSLR/SLR usage in general. Anything about exposure, lighting, etc. so you can do a running start with your camera once you get it. And when you get it your P&S will only be used when you can't bring your dSLR. I have a small SD1000 for clubs and parties where I can't bring my XSI.
I haven't reached a decision yet, but I think that a 40D and a tamron 17-50 might be a better choice for in the long run, with another good lens or two to add in the the next year. I would consider the 100mm macro on it as well, and maybe something ultra-wide or zoom, depending on what I shoot the most. The same counts for the other combo though.
As for converting from P&S to DSLR, I shoot most of my pics in Av now, and I play with white balance. Missing manual focus is what drives me nuts, so I think that won't bee too much of a hassle. Maybe starting with one lens could be a good thing
It's still a tough decision though, it basically comes down to whether the 40D + Tamron justifies not getting the 450D+kit and the 100mm macro
I think I might postpone the decision until I've held both in my hand with the lens attached to them. I just hope the store has all of them available as showroom model or if they actually open the boxes.
vinnakin wrote:
If you like the handling of your friend's 30D more than the 400D, going for the 40D seems logical to me.If you are going to spend a lot of time enjoing this hobby, the extra control wheel will be appreciated.I don't know if the 450 has spot metering.Have read only positive things about the 17-50, sounds like a mighty fine combo to me.
If you get the 100mm macro, you are going to want to get an off-shoe flash (preferably) or a tripod to really enjoy it.
The f2.8 is misleading for macros, where DOF can be razor thin. Hand-holding that lens to a close-up subject it is very difficult to get it in focus. You need a flash so you can tighten the aperture for a bit more DOF, or a tripod to hold the camera very steady.
The built in flash won't cut it - your lens will cast a shadow on up close subjects.
Imagemaster wrote:
Buy a used 40D from the FM Buy & Sell forum. Then buy whatever lenses you want.
40D has much better AF than the 450D.
I'm located in the Netherlands and I would really prefer to try it out before I buy it, whenever I buy something second-hand.
jade001 wrote:
Another consideration:
If you get the 100mm macro, you are going to want to get an off-shoe flash (preferably) or a tripod to really enjoy it.
The f2.8 is misleading for macros, where DOF can be razor thin. Hand-holding that lens to a close-up subject it is very difficult to get it in focus. You need a flash so you can tighten the aperture for a bit more DOF, or a tripod to hold the camera very steady.
The built in flash won't cut it - your lens will cast a shadow on up close subjects.
From what I've read, the 100mm performs way better at F8 - F11 for macro shooting. I'd love using it wide open for normal / portrait shooting though. Not necessarily for macro.
Thanks for the tip about flashing though, this is one of the things I might go budget on (like an entry-level Sunpak, Metz or a used Canon). I can see myself fabricating one of those led-macro rings though :P
TweakMDS wrote:
I'm located in the Netherlands and I would really prefer to try it out before I buy it, whenever I buy something second-hand.
Kamera-express can be a little difficult sometimes when it comes to testing out cameras. Better do that at your local cam store. Also, have you thought about Marktplaats.nl..? It's flooded with cheap used 40D right now... Maybe there is a bargain to be found over there
Daan B wrote:
Kamera-express can be a little difficult sometimes when it comes to testing out cameras. Better do that at your local cam store. Also, have you thought about Marktplaats.nl..? It's flooded with cheap used 40D right now... Maybe there is a bargain to be found over there
I'll give them a call this afternoon, to make sure they have both options in stock. I wouldn't mind handling a show-model and base my decision on that. I can understand them not opening 2 boxes and selling one of them. Much like I wouldn't like to buy a camera that has been felt up by hundreds of people before me <_<
TweakMDS wrote:
I'll give them a call this afternoon, to make sure they have both options in stock. I wouldn't mind handling a show-model and base my decision on that. I can understand them not opening 2 boxes and selling one of them. Much like I wouldn't like to buy a camera that has been felt up by hundreds of people before me <_<
Yeah, if they have a demo, that would be great. I go there regularly and know some of the sales people. Usually it is only possible to see the body. They don't want to put the battery in. Maybe they have second hand 40D's and 450D's? I guess it wouldn't be too much trouble to fire those up for you...
I personally like the menu navigation on the 450D, it feels more streamlined and easier to use. That said, I love the grip on the 40D, it's thicker and therefore just fits and very comfortable to hold.
Depending on what you like to shoot, you might appreciate the faster fps for continuous shooting in the 40D, I like to shoot landscape and macro so I don't really need the faster fps.
40D also has some problem with exposure when used with the MT-24EX twin macro flash.
CF memory cards for the 40D are generally more expensive than SDHC cards too I think.
There's a lot of good and accurate advice here, but consider that you're asking a lot of experienced 1D, 5D and XXD owners for advice. The answers you get will be influenced by this. I doubt though that in many cases they went directly to these cameras, but will have passed through ownership of a rebel 300/350D etc on the way. Theres a reason for this - the rebel series are excellent cameras at a very affordable price. They represent a perfect camera with which to develop skills and decide whether you want to pursue the hobby seriously.
Notice that no-one is suggesting that you'll get better quality images from a 40D - thats because you won't. In fact, unless you need the 6.5 fps (and slightly better autofocus) there's probably no functional difference between the cameras. Its all about ergonomics - The comments about handling and build quality are true (to a point), but if you're coming from a P&S a rebel XSi/450D will be a revelation anyway. And don't be put off by the build quality comments - the 40D might be better built, but the rebels aren't shoddy. You won't find buttons and connectors falling off after 6 months ownership. My 350D has lived through 2.5 years of skiing, camping and hiking and is still going strong.
And to complete my counterpoint, i'd say that whilst the kit lens is rated as being fairly crap, it can be argued that it is actually excellent value and well worth buying. Why? Because for 70 dollars or so (as part of the kit), and with 3 months of shooting, it will point you directly to the lenses you really want to buy. You can probably sell it at that time for 50 dollars anyway. Or you can keep it for when the wife/children want to borrow the camera. Either way its a great investment.
Speaking personally I have experience with all the grades of Canon dslr and I only suggested the 40D if it was going to be OP's *ONLY* camera, as I consider the xxD series more versatile and better made than the 450D.
For me, I absolutely love my 450D and won't be upgrading it for some time, it offers everything I need in a lightweight travel camera (that I don't need for sport)
As far as the kit lens goes I've had 2, one with IS and one without and IMHO they really, really hold the camera back, they are slow, of barely average quality and don;t get anything like the best out of the sensor. Many new users end up blaming the cameras when it's actually the kit lens thats letting them down. I would be really interested to see some kit lens shots (with 100% crops) that show how good it can be, as this is not my experience at all.
dhphoto wrote:
I would be really interested to see some kit lens shots (with 100% crops) that show how good it can be, as this is not my experience at all.
David
Well then what do you have to say about this? Quite interesting comparing an L lens to a couple of kit lenses 17-85mm and 18-55mm EF-S in their test.
It also should be noted that while the EF 24-105mm is optically superior to most EF-S lenses, if you close them all down to f8, there’s little between them in terms of real-life recorded detail.
dhphoto wrote:
Speaking personally I have experience with all the grades of Canon dslr and I only suggested the 40D if it was going to be OP's *ONLY* camera, as I consider the xxD series more versatile and better made than the 450D.
Its not really about whether the 40D is a better camera than the 450D, but whether its better for the OP. I agree with what you say, but consider that you are a damn good photographer and well able to take advantage of the differences between the 40D and 450D. But the 40D is (at uk prices) around 40% more expensive than the 450D. To the OP, thats about £170 spent on ergonomics which could be spent on glass, a flash or a decent tripod. Is it really worth paying that much extra on your first DSLR? (especially when the 450D is so good). I'm arguing that perhaps it isn't, but of course that is a personal issue and ultimately for him to decide after he handles the two side by side.
As far as the kit lens goes I've had 2, one with IS and one without and IMHO they really, really hold the camera back, they are slow, of barely average quality and don;t get anything like the best out of the sensor. Many new users end up blaming the cameras when it's actually the kit lens thats letting them down. I would be really interested to see some kit lens shots (with 100% crops) that show how good it can be, as this is not my experience at all.
David
My non IS kit lens was a total dog, with some serious resolution differences between left and right. But 3 months of using it pointed me directly to my next lens investment (a 17-40 L and 50mm F1.8). I think it was well worth the money in that regard. I've not used the new IS version, but it gets a glowing review at photozone.
I must have got a bad IS kit lens, the one I had was very little improved on the non-IS one. F5.6 is just too slow for a 55mm lens anyhow IMHO
I think the OP will be very happy with a 450D/Xsi, if he choses that over the 40D, apart from a high FPS there is very little it can't tackle admirably.
To me the 450D ranks along with the 5D as a bit of a modern classic. It just does what it does extremely well
